Web Analytics RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: More K-to-Q Adaptor Product Images

Sunday, August 28, 2011

More K-to-Q Adaptor Product Images

Further to the last official K->Q adaptor news, there are some more product photos of it posted by different people at the Internet recently:-

1. DA 40 F2.8 Pancake + Adaptor on Pentax Q:-



via DPR Post Here

It can be seen that the K-Q Adaptor can use DA lenses, as there is rough aperture control from "0" to "7", at least the aperture of a DA lens can be stopped down, although the exact f-number is not known. This is exactly the same design as the K-to-NX adaptor of Samsung, no difference. And the adaptor itself is a pure mechanical dongle all in all.

2. Pentax K 1000 F8 on Pentax Q (via the Adaptor, of course):-



via http://www.yaotomi.co.jp/blog/used/2011/08/post-69.html

Well, how would you use a lens with an effective focal/Angle of View at 5600mm but with an relative slow aperture speed of f/8 by the way?! :-o

Comments (9)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Oh, God, it is hideous...
Stupidity. Old lenses (M, K, A, FA, etc) doesn't work as expected even on APS-C (too much CA, sharpness isn't quite good wide open although it's enough for 35mm).
Michael A.'s avatar

Michael A. · 708 weeks ago

Your assumption OLD=CA is totally incorrect and shows you don't have any. I'm using K-5 & lenses from 1958 Tak to DA15 (40+ Pentax only) with very individual results. NONE performs a way what can't be corrected in PP. Think again and try it......
1 reply · active 708 weeks ago
I think Dennis makes a correct statement here in general as old film lenses often show more CAs on digitals and the problem is actually exaggerated with the multiplying factor.
Why is f8 considered slow for a 1000mm lens? You wouldn't consider a 500mm f5.6 slow would you? or a 250 f4?
1 reply · active 708 weeks ago
Consider the safe Tv.
Sure 1/1000th or there abouts. But this thing is closer to a telescope than it is a camera lens, so it's not surprising to need a tripod.
I think 300mm lens is pretty much the limit hand held anyway and why 300mm DA* will produce more detail than Sigma 50-500.
Sigma's gigantic 200-500/2.8 lens isn't hand holdable either unless you're this guy: http://files.digitalpixels.net/wp-content/uploads...
The Q mount means I can mount a 100 2.8 macro on it and have a extreme telephoto f2.8 without having to work out. Hooray!!!
2 replies · active 687 weeks ago
But you will end up with only 1/5.6th of the original optical resolution, which one could simply obtain by cropping the picture from a high-resolution sensor. There is no benefit of any after all.
If the sensor diagonal is around 11mm (25.4/2.3), the crop factor is 43/11=4.

Post a new comment

Comments by